Research firstTask by taskSources stay separate
How to read the exposure score — without mistaking it for a work plan
The Task Graph starts with public occupation tasks, attaches research only through recorded matches, and keeps technical exposure separate from observed AI use. The headline uses one named study and one documented calculation, so its meaning stays the same on every role page. Use it to identify activities worth closer investigation, then add the actual workflow, workload, tools, controls, and human context before making a decision.
Headline role score
OpenAI beta technical-exposure score
OpenAI labels each matched O*NET task E0, E1, or E2. E1 means the exposure threshold can be met with a language model alone. E2 means complementary AI-powered software or workflow changes are needed. E0 means the threshold was not met. The headline uses the paper's beta measure: E1 contributes 1, E2 contributes 0.5, and E0 contributes 0.
Example
(2 × 1 + 2 × 0.5 + 1 × 0) ÷ 5 = 60%
In this example, two core tasks are classified E1 and E2 and one supplemental task is E0. Following the OpenAI occupation method, core tasks count twice supplemental tasks. The source mix is 40% E1, 40% E2, and 20% E0. In the beta score, E1 contributes 40 points, E2 contributes 20 points, and E0 contributes none, producing 60%.
Read it as: “This weighted task mix has a 60% OpenAI beta technical- exposure score.” Do not read it as: “There is a 60% chance this role changes” or “60% of the job will be automated.”
Source meanings
Four sources, four different questions
OpenAI, GPTs are GPTs, 2023
Could an LLM or LLM-powered tool cut task time by at least half?
- Published result
- E0 means the study did not find that threshold; E1 means direct LLM access; E2 means an LLM-powered application.
- How we use it
- This task classification is the only source used in the headline beta technical-exposure score.
- Important limit
- A capability threshold, not observed use, adoption, or proof that the whole task should be automated.
Open sourceEconEvals, June 2026
How much task time could a text-only chatbot save?
- Published result
- A modeled time-saving band for each matched O*NET task: 0–24%, 25–49%, 50–74%, or 75–100%.
- How we use it
- Retained as supporting task research; it does not change the headline task classification or role exposure score.
- Important limit
- Synthetic prompts and model-based task walkthroughs; not observed workplace time savings and not agentic or multimodal AI.
Open sourceAnthropic Economic Index
Was AI use matching this task observed in the source snapshot?
- Published result
- A source-native task penetration value and a clear observed / not observed label.
- How we use it
- Shown as a separate observed-use finding; it never moves the headline percentage.
- Important limit
- The sample describes Anthropic usage, not the share of workers using AI. A zero means no observed use in the snapshot, not zero AI capability.
Open sourceO*NET 30.0 Task Ratings
How important, relevant, and frequent is the task in this occupation?
- Published result
- Incumbent survey values with sample size, uncertainty fields, survey date, and suppression flag.
- How we use it
- Shown as occupation context beside the task.
- Important limit
- Frequency counts how often a task occurs. It is not the share of working time spent on the task.
Open sourceEvidence matching
The page tells you how every task was linked
Same occupation and task ID
Used for the OpenAI task classifications behind the headline. The source and The Task Graph must share the O*NET occupation code and task ID.
Same occupation and task wording
Used for supporting evidence across O*NET releases after deterministic cleanup of case, punctuation, and spacing. It does not enter the headline percentage.
Same task wording
Used for observed-use data that publishes task text without an occupation key. The page says so explicitly because the match is broader.
Each evidence record stores the source, release, original task key or wording, mapping method, source URL, dataset URL, native label or value, and source-specific limitations. The public page shows the fields needed to understand the result without exposing local file paths or internal processing traces.
Work-time weighting
We do not invent a role's task-time split
O*NET publishes task frequency, but frequency is not duration. We therefore do not use it to claim how much of a role's working time is affected. The public score weights core tasks twice supplemental tasks because that is the published OpenAI occupation method; it does not pretend this is a split of working hours.
Personal and organization reports
Your workload changes the weighting, not the research
A person or organization can state how much work time each task takes. That can support a separate workload-weighted view of the same source-backed task classifications. Missing or incomparable workload values must remain missing instead of being guessed. The public occupation baseline always keeps the published core-versus- supplemental weighting and the beta E1/E2/E0 contributions.
Limitations
What the result cannot tell you
- The headline number is a source-weighted technical-exposure index, not a percentage of the role's working hours.
- The score is not the probability that change will occur and does not predict jobs lost, headcount removed, adoption timing, or money saved.
- The same public occupation can look different in a specific company, country, tool stack, or regulated workflow.
- Research releases are snapshots. Model capability and real use will change, so source date and version remain visible.
Inspect further
Follow the source, task, and match.
The source registry lists dataset versions and caveats. Every role page lets you open a task and inspect the result that contributed to the role exposure score.